· Private foundation
The Cedars Foundation Inc
Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k25 grants · $43k
- $10k–50k8 grants · $205k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $72k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| THE ASPEN INSTITUTE | $71,500 |
| SEACHANGE CAPITAL PARTNERS | $40,000 |
| OCEAN CONSERVANCY | $40,000 |
| RESOURCES FOR THE FUTURE | $40,000 |
| THE COMMITTEE FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT THE CONFERENCE BOARD | $25,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $25,000 |
| LSB LEAKEY FDTN FOR RESEARCH RELATED TO MANS ORIGINS BEHAVIOR AND SURVIVAL | $15,000 |
| AMERICAN TRUST FOR OXFORD UNIVERSITY | $10,000 |
| THE ROOSEVELT INSTITUTE | $10,000 |
| WATERFORD FOUNDATION | $7,500 |
| RICHARD III SOCIETY | $6,000 |
| SOCIETY OF AMERICAN HISTORIANS | $5,000 |
| TRUSTEES OF TUFTS COLLEGE | $3,000 |
| THE CARTER CENTER | $2,000 |
| NISKANEN CENTER | $2,000 |
Do your dollars go where the need is?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
Your human-services grants (FY21–22, $6k) land where the poverty rate runs at 26%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
Which US states your grants reach
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +58% since the first grant, against +46% for the ones you funded once.
72 repeat relationships — 28 still active in FY2024, 44 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 81% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $54k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). The earliest year is left-censored: relationships that predate the data read as “new.” Theme is the grantee’s IRS cause.
Backed again, and grew
- OCOCEAN CONSERVANCY5× · 2019–2024 · $311k · revenue +58%
THE ASPEN INSTITUTE INC7× · 2018–2024 · $151k · revenue +231%- AFAMERICANS FOR OXFORD INC6× · 2017–2023 · $125k · revenue +17%
Funded once
COOPERATIVE FOR ASSISTANCE AND RELIEF EVERYWHERE INCone grant, 2021 · $50k · revenue +12%- TCTHE CONFERENCE BOARD COMMITTEE FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENTone grant, 2021 · $25k
- CCEDone grant, 2019 · $25k
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
Wri is committed to creating change that improves people's lives and ensures the natural world can thrive. (see schedule o)wri's bold vision requires a formula for success we call "count it. change it. scale it.":- count it: our work is…
Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.
The open markets institute works to help people relearn how to use competition policy to build stronger democracies, more just and equitable societies, more innovative and sustainable economies, and a more secure and peaceful world.
The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.
The foreign policy research institute (frpi) is dedicated to producing the highest quality scholarship and nonpartisan policy analysis focused on crucial foreign policy and national security challenges facing the united states. we educate…
Organization mission the observer research foundation america orf america is an independent, non-partisan, and nonprofit organization in washington dc dedicated to addressing policy challenges facing the united states, india, and their…
Friends of the earth strives for a more healthy and just world by defendng the environment and human health while advancing social and economic justice by conducting research and education, transforming the economy so it protects the…
Provide an independent forum for those who dare to read, think, speak, and write to advance the professional, literary, and scientific understanding of sea power and other issues critical to global security.
To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.
The purpose of the water research foundation (wrf) is a definitive research organization to advance the science of all things water to better meet the evolving needs of its subscribers and the water sector. to engage exclusively in…
The peterson institute for international economics (piie) is an independent nonprofit, nonpartisan research organization dedicated to strengthening prosperity and human welfare in the global economy through expert analysis and practical…
Nrgi envisions a world where natural resources enable fair, prosperous and sustainable societies, instead of undermining them. nrgi exists because decisions about how natural resources are governed determine the well-being of people in…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Aspen Institute Inc and the most unlike its peers is Hamilton Volunteer Fire Department. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 39 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 1% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 1% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
80 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 80 of the 142 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them
A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.
- Who funds OCEAN CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds Resources for the Future Inc ↗
- Who funds THE ASPEN INSTITUTE INC ↗
- Who funds AMERICANS FOR OXFORD INC ↗
- Who funds SEACHANGE CAPITAL PARTNERS INC ↗
- Who funds LSB LEAKEY FDTN FOR RESEARCH RELATED TO HUMAN ORIGINS BEHAVIOR AND SURVIVAL ↗
- Who funds THE ROOSEVELT INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds VALLEY CONSERVATION COUNCIL ↗
- Who funds COOPERATIVE FOR ASSISTANCE AND RELIEF EVERYWHERE INC ↗
- Who funds THE HENRY L STIMSON CENTER ↗
- Who funds COALITION FOR INTEGRITY INC ↗
- Who funds AMER TR FOR OXFORD UNIV & EASTMAN 067381-000 ↗
- Who funds Waterford Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds LOYOLA MARYMOUNT UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds THE CARTER CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds CONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds RICHARD III SOCIETY INC ↗
- Who funds COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS INC ↗
- Who funds THE NISKANEN CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds THE BROOKINGS INSTITUTION ↗
- Who funds Outward Bound Center for Peacebuilding ↗
- Who funds GIRL BE HEARD INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds THE PIEDMONT ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL ↗
The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: The Goldman Sachs Charitable Gift Fund · The Ford Foundation · Pinkerton Foundation · Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Inc · Impactassetsinc · Carnegie Corporation of New York · The Keith Campbell Foundation for the Environment Inc · Jewish Communal Fund · The Ayco Charitable Foundation · John D and Catherine T Macarthur Foundation · The Miami Foundation Inc · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization The Cedars Foundation Inc funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Trustees of Tufts College — 13% of income from government
- Chesapeake Bay Foundation Inc — 2% of income from government
- Wounded Warrior Project Inc — 0% of income from government
Government income is each org’s traced federal awards (USASpending — grants and contracts) plus state payments (open checkbooks) as a share of its total revenue (IRS Form 990); the self-reported government-grant line (990 line 1e) is carried for cross-check: a grantee that reports government grants we could not trace to a source is left off the chart rather than shown as receiving none. An association, not a claim that your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not a census; state records exist for 9 states, so a grantee outside them shows no state figure (dimmed) rather than a false zero. Federal award amounts are obligations, which can span years, so a single-year share is indicative. 990 filings lag 12–24 months.